General military questions thread

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Everyone's missing the point. The issue isn't 'would destroying the dam cripple the PRC, doing enough damage to cause it to lose stability/the Mandate of Heaven/what Liu Cixin described as 'the foundation of human civilization is to have things to eat'. Nor is it 'could the dam be destroyed'. It almost certainly would and there are almost certainly multiple plans of varying degrees of practicality and sanity in folders in the pentagon or some technothriller writer's drafts for how it could. Rather, the point is that the PRC would launch a retaliation strike and given that they've got nuclear ICBMs and very likely software backdoor killswitches in all our civilian infrastructure, they could also destroy us as well before they collapsed. This leaves the possibility of false-flagging the dam's destruction as a natural disaster or some kind of jihadist attacker upset by the uighur genocide for use of a standard Alphabet Agency proxy, but that doesn't take into account the possibility that the PRC might launch a nuclear retaliation strike anyway, given that they were already losing and couldn't prove it wasn't some CIA scheme, or that given their track record over the past few decades, I have minimal confidence that the Alphabet Agencies could pull it off at all and none that they could successfully hide their presence.
The collapse would be two fold.
Destroy the civilian structure we destroy everything of thiers.
But the Dam definitely is a target for sabotage.

Most likely going to burst before that thoigh
 

Bassoe

Well-known member
The collapse would be two fold.
Destroy the civilian structure we destroy everything of thiers.
That's not my point. Yes, we could destroy the dam and yes, destroying the dam would cripple if not outright destroy China, but if we did, they'd retaliate and they also have the ability to cripple if not outright destroy us. Our ability to destroy the dam was never in doubt. Our ability to destroy it without getting destroyed in turn on the other hand...
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
That's not my point. Yes, we could destroy the dam and yes, destroying the dam would cripple if not outright destroy China, but if we did, they'd retaliate and they also have the ability to cripple if not outright destroy us. Our ability to destroy the dam was never in doubt. Our ability to destroy it without getting destroyed in turn on the other hand...
We can totally destroy it without getting destroyed. Wait for them to invade Taiwan. At that point gloves off.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
You destroy that dam, say hello to a lot of nukes.
You are the same people saying China would actually nuke japan if Japan defends Taiwan.
China can recover from the dam bursting, the CCP cant. The dam busting would most likely cause a revolt within the country toturn against the government.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
That does us zero good, given that the revolutionaries wouldn't be the ones in control of China's preexisting nuclear arsenal, the PRC leadership would be. If they're going down, what motive do they have to not take us with them?
Because just like every military out there.
People will be out for their own gain, and will take over after the death of their leader. Do a good ol treaty.

Well and the fact we have a very good defense grid.
 

paulobrito

Well-known member
You are the same people saying China would actually nuke japan if Japan defends Taiwan.
China can recover from the dam bursting, the CCP cant. The dam busting would most likely cause a revolt within the country toturn against the government.
Frankly, you are delusional if you think an attack of that magnitude doesn't receive an answer in kind. And China can do that to any nation on Earth.
And the fixation of US ones that the adversary of the day after a big attack turns to massive revolts - hint, that never happened - is frankly idiotic.
 

paulobrito

Well-known member
Well and the fact we have a very good defense grid.
Good defense grid... right.
Let's see - China fires a hundred ICBM (with MIRV) at you. Because you can't - geography - hit then on the ascending phase (the easy one) you have to deal with the descending one, with the warheads already separated. If each missile launch 5 warheads plus 5 decoys, you have to deal with a thousand targets. Good luck with that.
Note.: DF-41 can carry 10-12 warheads/decoys.
 
Last edited:

Bassoe

Well-known member
You are the same people saying China would actually nuke japan if Japan defends Taiwan.
No, insofar as if I was, we wouldn't be in this mess, insofar as I'd be the one running China. That's where the 'we'll use nukes if someone attacks us/attempts to prevent our imperialism' claims are coming from, China's leadership.
Well and the fact we have a very good defense grid.
How is this supposed to comfort me? If we're subjected to MAD attack, I hope our leaders don't survive in bunkers, insofar as I already hate them, in the brief remainder of the rest of my life before being vaporized by a nuke I'd only grow to hate them even more for getting me/the country as a whole into this mess in the first place and I know that if they know that nuclear war inevitably means their own deaths, this'll decrease the chance they'll launch one.
 

Arch Dornan

Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
Knowing the IDF it's probably more of an "inclusivity" thing, I'd say. It looks like the media is not making a big deal out of it though, here is the first I hear of it.
I like to read from a lot of places let's just say and I found this.

I'm not expecting a disaster like McNamara's idea when applied sensibly to appropriate duties but one can wonder when I know the IDF has enemies nearby who want to do terrible terrible things to Israel.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top